GTX 970 vs R9 290 vs R9 290X

GTX 970 vs R9 290 vs R9 290X

  • Total voters
    86
I'd go with the 970 since the price difference is only 40$.
I'm also torn between a Giga R9 290 (~300$) and a Giga 970 (~500$). I know, prices are inflated where I live. I don't know it the 970 is really worth the premium or I should just be content with a 290 and wait for the 20nm generation.
 
The XFX 290x DD has been $300 from amazon.
There are 290's hitting $230. (HIS iceQ)

The amd cards are getting huge price cuts and at 4k are very competitive with the 970.
 
Poranosaurus said:
I don't know it the 970 is really worth the premium or I should just be content with a 290 and wait for the 20nm generation.
Click to expand...

970 is a BEAST. There's no comparison. 290/290X were good for their time, but its over. Thus its not really a fair comparison for AMD's cards since their previous gen.

And "premium"?? We're only talking $40 for cooler/quieter/more OC headroom/less power/NVIDIA features like DSR, and Shadowplay for zero impact recording/broadcasting.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
970 is a BEAST. There's no comparison. 290/290X were good for their time, but its over. Thus its not really a fair comparison for AMD's cards since their previous gen.

And "premium"?? We're only talking $40 for cooler/quieter/more OC headroom/less power/NVIDIA features like DSR, and Shadowplay for zero impact recording/broadcasting.
Click to expand...

Did you read the previous part in my post where I stated that the prices of those cards where I live?
I also suggest the TC to go for the 970 though. What Im talking about is MY situation.
 
The 290x beats the 970 imo. As a plus it's cheaper than the 970. A one downfall is heat, but I run 2-290x without much heat issues.

The 980 on the other hand blows the 290x out of the water, but the price is high and hard to find here and there and coil whine is around probably for a little longer before those "bad" ones get sold off.
 
The 290x and the GTX 970 are about even at 1440p stock speeds. The 970 will probably be a few percent faster if they are both overclocked.
Are there any reviews that compare the 290x and 970 with both cards fully overclocked?
Hopefully HardOcp will come out with one since the prices are comparable now.
 
I would go for the 970 and plan to pick up another for SLI in the nearish future. I agree that at stock, 1440p should be about the same on both, but SLI will be necessary for the 4k 40".

SLI with much less power consumption and quieter...
 
290x as 4k still are an area where the buss and ram starts to affect fps.
NH did this test a swedish site.

ShadowOfMordor_4K.png
 
970 if you overclock. People on OCN are getting 1600mz core clock with custom BIOS' and never hitting 65C. That to me is what makes Maxwell amazing. Just pray to the gods you don't get coil whine and you should be all set.
 
Flopper said:
290x as 4k still are an area where the buss and ram starts to affect fps.
NH did this test a swedish site.

ShadowOfMordor_4K.png
Click to expand...

If that were the case then the 290 would be faster then the 980.
Both HardwareCanucks and Techpowerup show the SLI 980 an average of 7% faster then the 295x at 4K.
 
naticus said:
970 if you overclock. People on OCN are getting 1600mz core clock with custom BIOS' and never hitting 65C. That to me is what makes Maxwell amazing. Just pray to the gods you don't get coil whine and you should be all set.
Click to expand...

I don't trust much on OCN, there are so many people like "Guiz I got my card 1580 STABLE in 3D Mark, when I open a game the card crashes, what's wrong?!?" If it's not that, it's all the people crying because their 1600 overclock crashes on light loads. Meanwhile the same info gets regurgitated every 10th post that no one reads. The intelligent overclockers are far outnumbered by the nubs.
 
The 290x is hovering around $300 right now as opposed to $350'ish for the 970 so considering they both perform about the same I'd rather go with the 290x.
 
Since this is about 4K gaming, I'd have to go with the 290X also. If it was about 1080p, then I'd recommend the 970.
 
ocellaris said:
I don't trust much on OCN, there are so many people like "Guiz I got my card 1580 STABLE in 3D Mark, when I open a game the card crashes, what's wrong?!?" If it's not that, it's all the people crying because their 1600 overclock crashes on light loads. Meanwhile the same info gets regurgitated every 10th post that no one reads. The intelligent overclockers are far outnumbered by the nubs.
Click to expand...

To be fair I can get mine to 1600mhz (Stable) as well with the G1 modded BIOS. So as long as you go Giga G1 970 you should be good. Did 1640core but it crashed half way through the benchmark:

A8kuuT4.png
 
970. evga sc model outperforms that sapphire 290X at every resolution in all the games i looked at (by a little bit.) it'll also overclock better. do not get the evga though. the msi and gigabyte models are better.
 
Definitely the 970. The mITX version put out by Gigabyte opens up the possibility of tiny rigs that can max out a 1440p monitor while staying well under the 500w power limit of most SFX PSUs.
 
DPI said:
970 is a BEAST. There's no comparison. 290/290X were good for their time, but its over. Thus its not really a fair comparison for AMD's cards since their previous gen.

And "premium"?? We're only talking $40 for cooler/quieter/more OC headroom/less power/NVIDIA features like DSR, and Shadowplay for zero impact recording/broadcasting.
Click to expand...

I don't think the 970 is a beast. There isn't much between it and the previous generation cards in performance.

You are also forgetting that He won't be using DSR on a 4K monitor and AMD also have zero impact recording through raptr. And the R9 290 cars he is looking it run both cool and quiet.

It's not a clear cut choice by any means.
 
Poranosaurus said:
I'd go with the 970 since the price difference is only 40$.
I'm also torn between a Giga R9 290 (~300$) and a Giga 970 (~500$). I know, prices are inflated where I live. I don't know it the 970 is really worth the premium or I should just be content with a 290 and wait for the 20nm generation.
Click to expand...

Not worth it at those prices. Wait for the die shrink. Well, that's what I am doing.
 
ocellaris said:
I don't trust much on OCN, there are so many people like "Guiz I got my card 1580 STABLE in 3D Mark, when I open a game the card crashes, what's wrong?!?" If it's not that, it's all the people crying because their 1600 overclock crashes on light loads. Meanwhile the same info gets regurgitated every 10th post that no one reads. The intelligent overclockers are far outnumbered by the nubs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I stopped listening to people's quoted overclocksyears ago. It happens on most forums.
 
reaper12 said:
I don't think the 970 is a beast. There isn't much between it and the previous generation cards in performance.

You are also forgetting that He won't be using DSR on a 4K monitor and AMD also have zero impact recording through raptr. And the R9 290 cars he is looking it run both cool and quiet.

It's not a clear cut choice by any means.
Click to expand...

the 970 is 30% faster than the 770 it has replaced, while using 20% less power and having a $70 lower launch msrp. that counts as 'not much'?
 
Scatcats22 said:
Or for $320, I can get this Sapphire R9 290 Vapor X.
Click to expand...

I would get a 970. Even with the coil whine issues your 970 should do 1500core and 8000mem out of the gate without touching the voltage. So you have a card that has massive overclock potential combined with less heat and noise ( if no coil whine). My card at 1.275 volts (modded bios) is stable at 1600mhz core. That is INSANE. Oh and I haven't seen a temp higher than 65C.
 
The 290/x is faster than the 970... But the 970 is so cool and quiet and often gets to a solid 1500mhz boost.
 
If you are going 4k, 290x > 970/290.

If you plan to play at 1440p/1080p 970 gtx.
 
Just noticed something in the OP. If you plan to play 4k on a 40 inch tv the 970 will bennefit from having HDMI 2.0. Otherwise if you overclock get a 970 if you leave cards at stock settings get the 290X. If you choose to game at 4k and NOT overclock, slap yourself in the face.. [H]ard!
 
Odellus said:
the 970 is 30% faster than the 770 it has replaced, while using 20% less power and having a $70 lower launch msrp. that counts as 'not much'?
Click to expand...

LOL the 770 is the generation before last. It's just a highly clocked GK104 with faster memory chips.

And besides, the post I was replying to was comparing the 970 to 290/290x and in relation to the context of this thread.

My comment still stands, the 970 is good card with great power/performance ratio, but it's certainly not a "BEAST" And with regards to performance there is nothing between the 970 and previous generation cards.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
Just noticed something in the OP. If you plan to play 4k on a 40 inch tv the 970 will bennefit from having HDMI 2.0. Otherwise if you overclock get a 970 if you leave cards at stock settings get the 290X. If you choose to game at 4k and NOT overclock, slap yourself in the face.. [H]ard!
Click to expand...

Can I ask a little more about that? Does the TV need to support hdmi 2.0 and are there any on the market that support it? I honestly don't keep up on that stuff. Thanks
 
BababooeyHTJ said:
Can I ask a little more about that? Does the TV need to support hdmi 2.0 and are there any on the market that support it? I honestly don't keep up on that stuff. Thanks
Click to expand...

HDMI 2.0 is kind of controversial in the sense that some manufacturers are saying all that is needed is a firmware flash and others are saying their internal controllers are limited to the 1.4 spec. Sony stated that in anticipation to the new tech they installed a higher end controller in some of their HDMI ports so that they can update firmware later to support the standard and supposedly all of their 4k TV's can and will support HDMI 2.0.

The biggest improvement to note is 4k @ 60fps instead of 4k @ 30fps. With HDMI 2.0 a GTX 900 card can run 60hz refresh whereas Non Supported graphics cards will run 4k @ only 30hz.

Here is an interesting write up Cnet did http://www.cnet.com/news/hdmi-2-0-what-you-need-to-know/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top